1

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LEE COUNTY, ALABAMA

STATE OF ALABAMA, )

)

)

)

v. ) CASE NO. CC-2014-000565

)

)

)

MICHAEL GREGORY HUBBARD, )

)

Defendant. )

STATES RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT

The State of Alabama hereby submits its Response in Opposition to

defendant Michael Gregory Hubbards (Hubbard) Motion for More Definite

Statement. The twenty-three-count indictment clearly and succinctly sets forth the

charges against Hubbard and he has failed to show good cause for the requested

relief. Accordingly, the Motion is due to be denied.

INTRODUCTION

Led by newly-elected Speaker Mike Hubbard, the Alabama House of

Representatives passed a new set of ethics law reforms on December 15, 2010. On

October 17, 2014 Hubbard was indicted for twenty-three felonies, most of which

involve violations of the ethics reforms he championed in 2010, but all of which

arise out of the ethics law statute, Ala. Code 36-25-1, et seq. (hereinafter Ethics

ELECTRONICALLY FILED2/27/2015 12:25 PM

43-CC-2014-000565.00CIRCUIT COURT OF

LEE COUNTY, ALABAMAMARY B. ROBERSON, CLERK

2

Laws). A Lee County grand jury charged Hubbard with using his elected position

in the House of Representatives and as Chairman of the Alabama Republican Party

to make money and obtain financial favors from lobbyists and others with interests

before the Legislature. Specifically, the grand jury returned an indictment charging

Hubbard with six counts of violating 36-25-5(a), Ala. Code (1975), Use of office

for personal gain (Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 11); one count of violating 36-25-5(b),

Voting for legislation with a conflict of interest (Count 5); eleven counts of

violating 36-25-5.1(a), Soliciting or receiving a thing of value from a lobbyist or

principal (Counts 6, 10, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23); four counts of violating

36-25-1.1, Lobbying an executive department or agency for a fee (Counts 8, 9,

12, 13); and one count of violating 36-25-5(c), Use of equipment, materials, etc.

(Count 14).

Even though the indictment clearly sets forth the charges against Hubbard,

he demands that the State specifically describe its evidence and explain to the

defense how the State intends to prove the requirements of each and every

statutory element contained in the indictment. There is no basis under Alabama

law for Hubbards request and his Motion should therefore be denied.

ARGUMENT

The indictment clearly and succinctly includes all of the elements of the

Ethics Laws Hubbard is accused of violating as the charges track the statutory

3

language of those laws.1 The indictment further concisely sets forth the factual

allegations forming the basis for each of the charges. As an additional matter, the

over 2.5 million pages of documents produced by the State in discovery also

sufficiently inform Hubbard of the nature of the crimes with which he has been

charged. As such, Hubbard failed to show good cause and he is therefore not

entitled to a more definite statement of the charges set forth in the indictment.

As this Court has already held, [t]he rule in Alabama is that an indictment

is sufficient if it charges the elements of the statutory offense in the words of the

statute. (June 13, 2014 Order, State v. Felix Barry Moore, CC-2014-226, at p. 2)

(citing Nance v. State, 424 So.2d 1358 (Ala. Crim. App. 1982); Ex parte Allred,

393 So.2d 1030 (Ala. 1980)). Indeed, Hubbard concedes that the indictment does

use the language of the statute, which means that the indictment is sufficient on its

face. (Motion, at 2); see Ex parte Allred, 393 So.2d 1030, 1032 (Ala. 1980) (An

indictment is sufficient [if it] substantially follows the language of the statute,

provided the statute prescribes with definiteness the constituents of the offense.);

Ex parte Harper, 594 So.2d 1181, 1183 (Ala. 1991) (The general rule in

Alabama, even before the adoption of Temporary Rule 15 (now Rule 13), was that

it was sufficient to charge the elements of the statutory offense in the words of the

1 Notably, Hubbards Motion does not allege that the State has omitted any elements of the crimes for which he is charged. 2 This pleading is neither an exhaustive list of the States evidence and theories of criminal

liability, nor does it confine or limit the States ability to argue or present evidence at trial.

4

statute, provided the statute prescribed with definiteness the constituent elements

of the offense.) (citing Allred).

The purpose of this rule is to place the defendant on notice of the nature of

the accusation against him so that he may prepare a defense. (Order, State v. Felix

Barry Moore, at p. 2). As such, Alabama law merely requires an indictment to

contain a statement of legal conclusion and it is not required that an indictment

plead evidentiary facts necessary to a conviction. See Rule 13.2, Committee

Comments (citing Hochman v. State, 91 So.2d 500, 501 (Ala. 1956)); see also

Moore v. State, 697 So.2d 800, 802 (Ala. Crim. App. 1996) (An indictment is

sufficient if it apprises the accused with a reasonable certainty of the nature of the

accusation against him so that he may prepare his defense and plead the judgment

of conviction as a bar to any subsequent prosecution for the same offense.).

Accordingly, the indictment here is sufficiently definite to inform Hubbard of

the charges against him. Rule 13.2(a), Ala. R. Crim. P.

While the indictment alone is more than sufficient to put Hubbard on notice

of the crimes with which he has been charged, any possible doubt concerning the

legal or factual bases for the charges in the indictment disappears when the

indictment is read in conjunction with the States substantial document production.

On February 17, 2015, the State produced emails, bank records, business records,

witness statements, and other documents totaling over 2.5 million pages to

5

Hubbard. The States production, taken with the indictment is more than sufficient

to inform Hubbard of the nature of the charges against him. See R.A.S. v. State,

718 So.2d 117, 121 (Ala. 1998) (The Court of Criminal Appeals correctly noted

that any critical details that are available to the State could be gathered by the

defendant through a preliminary hearing, a motion for a more definite statement, as

authorized by Rule 13.2(e), Ala. R. Crim. P., or other pretrial discovery

procedures.) (emphasis added). Hubbards request for additional details is

therefore due to be denied.

In his Motion, Hubbard erroneously asserts that he is entitled to a pre-trial

summary of the States presentation of the evidentiary facts necessary to convict

him at trial. Alabama law, however, does not require the State to provide the

defense with an advance blueprint of its trial presentation; instead, the law allows

the State to answer these questions during its case-in-chief. Ignoring Alabama law,

Hubbard essentially seeks a bill of particulars even though Alabama does not

recognize a bill of particulars and the practice has never prevailed in this State.

Jones v. State, 34 So. 236, 238 (Ala. 1903); see also Johnson v. State, 335 So.2d

663, 672 (Ala. Crim. App. 1976) (An accused is not entitled to a bill of particulars

under Alabama law.). For this additional reason, his Motion is due to be denied.

Finally, a defendant must show good cause before a motion for more

definite statement should be granted. Rule 13.2 (e), Ala. R. Crim. P.; see also id.,

6

Committee Comments (Because of the good cause requirement, it is

contemplated that motions for more definite statement will not be routinely made

or granted.) (emphasis added). Here, Hubbard has failed to show good cause

because the indictment tracks the language of the statute and the discovery

provided by the State is more than sufficient to inform Hubbard of the charges

against him. See also Hunt v. State, 642 So.2d 999, 1026 (Ala. Crim. App. 1993)

(While the sufficiency of a criminal indictment is determined from its face and

within the four corners of the indictment, any vagueness or uncertainty in

Hunt's understanding of the indictment was removed by the Attorney General's

lengthy response to Hunt's motion for a more definite statement.).

As discussed below, the indictment and discovery show that Hubbard has

been charged with the following criminal schemes: (1) Hubbards use of his office

as Chairman of the Alabama Republican Party to obtain over one million dollars in

personal gain for himself, Craftmaster or the Auburn Network (Counts 1-4); (2)

Hubbards solicitation and receipt of $5,000.00 per month from principal

American Pharmacy Cooperative, Inc. (APCI) and his votes in favor of

legislation that uniquely benefited APCI, (Counts 5-6); (3) Hubbards use of his

office for personal gain through his $12,000.00 contract with Southeast Alabama

Gas District (SEAGD) (Counts 7-9); (4) Hubbards solicitation and receipt of

$7,500.00 per month from principal Edgenuity/E2020 (Count 10); (5) Hubbards

7

use of his office for personal gain through his $10,000.00 per month contract with

Bobby Abrams business (Counts 11-14); (6) Hubbards solicitation and receipt of

$600,000.00 from principals for Craftmaster (Counts 15-19); and (7) Hubbards

solicitation and receipt of financial favors from lobbyists and principals to help

Auburn Network obtain more clients (Counts 20-23).2

I. Counts 1-4: Hubbard used his office as Chairman of the Alabama

Republican Party to obtain personal gain for himself, Craftmaster or

the Auburn Network.

Hubbard served as Chairman of the Alabama Republican Party (ALGOP)

from 2007 to 2011. Under the Ethics Law, this position qualifies as a public

official. See 36-25-1(27), Ala. Code (1975). The Ethics Law forbids a public

official from using his office to obtain personal gain for himself or a business with

which he is associated. See 36-25-5(a), Ala. Code (1975). Counts 1 through 4 in

the indictment allege that Hubbard used this position to obtain personal gain for

himself, Craftmaster, or the Auburn Network. Since Hubbard is an owner of

Craftmaster and the Auburn Network, these are businesses with which he is

2 This pleading is neither an exhaustive list of the States evidence and theories of criminal

liability, nor does it confine or limit the States ability to argue or present evidence at trial. Instead, the States Response merely provides examples by which the indictment and the States discovery production adequately inform Hubbard of the nature of the charges against him,

illustrating that Hubbard cannot show good cause for the granting of his Motion. See Hunt, 642 So. 2d at 1026. All of the facts set forth here can be found in the indictment and the

discovery provided to the defense. In other words, nothing recited herein cannot be known by

Hubbard by simply looking at the indictment and the discovery produced by the State.

8

associated. See 36-25-1(2) (defining business with which the person is

associated).

Count 1 alleges that Hubbard used his position as ALGOP chairman to

benefit himself or Craftmaster by spending approximately $101,926.00 of ALGOP

money directly with Craftmaster in exchange for printing services. (See

Indictment, Count 1). That is, Hubbard directed money he controlled by virtue of

his office to be spent with his printing business in order to obtain financial gain for

himself and his printing business.

Likewise, Count 2 alleges that Hubbard used his position as ALGOP

chairman to benefit himself or Auburn Network by spending approximately

$41,836.00 of ALGOP money directly with Auburn Network in exchange for

media services. (See Indictment, Count 2). Specifically, Hubbard directed money

he controlled by virtue of his office to be spent with his media business in order to

obtain financial gain for himself and Auburn Network.

Count 3 alleges Hubbard also directed ALGOP money to Craftmaster

through an intermediary, Majority Strategies. That company received $787,379.00

from the ALGOP, which then provided $697,479.00 to Craftmaster. (See

Indictment, Count 3). Hubbard used his position as ALGOP chairman to require

Majority Strategies to subcontract printing services from Craftmaster, even though

Craftmaster was not the lowest-cost printer. This fact is shown by, among other

9

things, an email between Majority Strategies executives Randy Kammerdiner and

Brett Buerck where they lamented being forced to use the high-priced Craftmaster:

Its fine to explain that we could actually send [Craftmaster] business if their prices were more in line with what we pay other places ...

Based on a message I got from Hubbard last night, our relationship

relationship [sic] with them is still very tenous [sic]. And because I

am a greedy bastard I would rather us swallow our pride and also

make a lower profit margin in order to keep the client rather than

getting black-balled in a state because we think the printer is making

too much money and we dont like being forced to use them.

(AG2278395, email from Kammerdiener to Buerck, attached hereto as Exhibit 1);

(see also AG2171242 email from Kammerdiener to ALGOP employee Michael

Joffrin, attached hereto as Exhibit 2) (Per Mike, were printing at Craftmaster and

just passing the actual charges on to you all [ALGOP].).

Hubbards decision to force Majority Strategies to use Craftmaster caused

friction between the two businesses. Craftmaster President Barry Whatley

complained that Buerck routinely sent [him] emails blasting us about price, turn

time and quote turn time. (AG2243495, attached hereto as Exhibit 3). Whatley

also noted that he was not able to find a single job since 2009 that did not come to

Craftmaster via Majority Strategies that is not directly linked to Mike Hubbard.

(Id. at AG2243496). Hubbards frustration with Majority Strategies complaints

about Craftmaster prompted him to email ALGOP Executive Director John Ross as

follows: I am going to pay a printing company I own part of DIRECTLY. Not

through a company that is ungrateful for business and insists on being difficult. Is

10

that clear to everyone? (AG2278663, attached hereto as Exhibit 4). Kammerdiner

explained Majority Strategies position on the issue by telling Hubbard: I dont

think Brett [Buerck] has an issue with you or Craftmaster. Hes just a numbers guy

who likes to print where we get the best pricing. (AG2260766, attached hereto as

Exhibit 5). Thus, Hubbard used his position as ALGOP chairman to force Majority

Strategies to sub-contract printing services with the more expensive Craftmaster to

benefit Hubbard and the business he owns.

Similarly, Count 4 alleges Hubbard directed ALGOP money to Auburn

Network through an intermediary, Tim Howe and his business entities, which were

nothing more than a pass through for Hubbard to conceal and launder ALGOP

money to the Auburn Network. (See Indictment, Count 4). Specifically, Hubbard

spent approximately $171,203.00 of ALGOP money through Howes companies

on services provided by Auburn Network. (AGdoc0064449-AG2168868-042,

attached hereto as Exhibit 6).

As shown above, Hubbard repeatedly used his position as ALGOP chairman

to essentially embezzle over one million dollars (approximately $1,012,444.00) in

ALGOP money to Hubbards printing and media businesses. Since the State has

provided this information to the defense through the indictment and discovery,

then Hubbards Motion for More Definite Statement is due to be denied as to

Counts 1-4 in the indictment.

11

II. Counts 5-6: Hubbard Voted for Legislation that Uniquely Benefited

Auburn Networks Client, American Pharmacy Cooperative, Inc.

In September 2012, the Alabama Medicaid Agency (Medicaid) began

researching the financial benefits of implementing a pharmacy benefit manager

program (PBM) for Medicaid. (AGdoc0235246, Wren Plea Agreement, attached

hereto as Exhibit 7). American Pharmacy Cooperative, Inc. (APCI), an Alabama

based pharmacy cooperative, represented the interests of independent pharmacies.

(Id.). APCI was not initially in favor of Medicaids idea of a commercial PBM.

(AGdoc0092716, attached hereto as Exhibit 8). Accordingly, during 2012 and

2013, APCI engaged in efforts to influence the Alabama Legislature and affect

legislation related to the implementation of a PBM by Medicaid. (See Ex. 7). As

part of these efforts, APCI employed lobbyist Ferrell Patrick to advocate for their

interests in the PBM legislation. (See AGdoc0229507-38, attached hereto as

Exhibit 9).

At the same time that it was paying Patrick for his lobbying efforts, APCI

was paying Hubbard $5,000.00 per month (approximately $95,000.00 total from

August 2012 to December 2013) to work as a consultant. (See APCI Contract,

AGdoc0107456, attached hereto as Exhibit 10). While he was being paid by APCI

to act as its consultant, Hubbard sent an e-mail to Ferrell Patrick in which

Hubbard agreed to send a letter to the Chair of the Alabama Medicaid Transition

Taskforce, Dr. Don Williamson, which would disparage Medicaids attempt to

12

implement a PBM program. (Letter, AG0166380, attached hereto as Exhibit 11);

(E-mail, AG0166383, attached hereto as Exhibit 12).

As it became clear that Medicaid was going to continue its efforts to

implement a PBM program despite Patrick and Hubbards efforts to oppose such a

program on behalf of APCI, APCIs position evolved from trying to stop Medicaid

from implementing a commercial PBM program to introducing APCIs own

legislative language that would benefit APCI. To that end, in February 2013, APCI

provided language to Rep. Greg Wren for inclusion in legislation.3 The language

provided to Rep. Wren by APCI set forth specific requirements that any entity

operating as a PBM for Medicaid would have to meet in order to be eligible to

perform that function. Based on the requirements in that language, APCI was the

sole potential PBM provider that would be eligible to function as a PBM for

Medicaid.

Rep. Wren, and Patrick, had various meetings with members of the Alabama

Legislature in which Rep. Wren sought support for the APCI drafted language.

Relevant leadership of the Alabama House of Representatives, including Hubbard

and his staff, attended some of those meetings. After attending such meetings,

Hubbard endorsed the language APCI drafted that would result in it being the sole

3 Greg Wren was a Representative in the Alabama House of Representatives until April 1, 2014

when he resigned his office and pleaded guilty to using his office for personal gain in violation

of 36-25-5(a). See State of Alabama v. Greg David Wren, DC-2014-000809 (Montgomery

County District Court); (see also Ex. 7).

13

Medicaid PBM, and Hubbard directed his staff to add the language to Medicaids

section of the General Fund Budget. In fact, Hubbards Chief Legal Advisor, Jason

Isbell, e-mailed the APCI language to Norris Green, the head of the Legislative

Fiscal Office, for inclusion in the General Fund Budget Bill. (AGdoc0223151,

attached hereto as Exhibit 13). Shortly thereafter, the APCI drafted language

became a part of the House of Representatives substitute version of the General

Fund Budget. (AGdoc0232108-09, attached hereto as Exhibit 14). The President

and CEO of APCI, Tim Hamrick, then sent a letter to Hubbard thanking him for

adding the APCI drafted language in the legislation. (AG0170228, attached hereto

as Exhibit 15).

On April 23, 2013, the substitute version, Senate Bill 143 (SB 143), was

voted on and approved by the House of Representatives. Hubbard voted yes on

SB 143 even though it contained the APCI drafted language that would make

APCI, for whom Hubbard was employed as a consultant, the exclusive PBM for

Medicaid. (AGdoc0232147, attached hereto as Exhibit 16). Accordingly, the

indictment charges that Hubbard was receiving money from APCI while directly

participating in and voting for legislation that uniquely benefited APCI by giving it

a monopoly over the State Medicaid prescription drug business. By voting for this

legislation, and participating in the legislative process to bring the bill to a vote in

the House, Hubbard violated the Ethics Laws prohibition against legislators voting

14

for legislation on which they have a conflict of interest. See 36-25-5(b), Ala.

Code (1975); (Indictment, Count 5).

Also, because APCI had active interests before the legislature and employed

lobbyists, Hubbard ran afoul of the ban on soliciting or receiving things of value

from a principal, (i.e., one who employs a lobbyist). See 36-25-5.1(a), Ala.

Code (1975); (Indictment, Count 6). The fact that APCI lobbyist Ferrell Patrick

and APCI consultant Hubbard simultaneously worked to pass APCIs legislation

containing language that would make APCI the sole PBM for Medicaid in

Alabama underscores the impropriety of Hubbards soliciting and receiving money

from APCI.

Thus, the indictment, along with the States discovery, clearly informs

Hubbard of the nature of the crimes with which he has been charged regarding

APCI namely, that Hubbard was paid $5,000.00 per month by a principal and

that he had a conflict of interest in voting for legislation that uniquely benefited

APCI. Thus, his Motion for More Definite Statement should be denied as to

Counts 5-6.

III. Counts 7-9: Hubbard used his office for personal gain through his

contract with Southeast Alabama Gas District.

Shortly after his election as Speaker of the House on December 8, 2010,

Hubbard began experiencing serious financial problems. For example, his primary

employer, IMG, informed Hubbard that he was being laid off effective March 31,

15

2011 and would receive severance pay through March 31, 2012. (AGdoc0200585,

attached hereto as Exhibit 17). After March 31, 2012, Hubbard, through Auburn

Network, only received commission sales income from IMG. (AG0200586-90,

attached hereto as Exhibit 18). Hubbard immediately sought to find clients for

Auburn Network that could replace Hubbards lost income from IMG.

Through the assistance of former Governor Bob Riley and others, Hubbard

was able to obtain a $12,000.00 per month contract with the Southeast Alabama

Gas District (SEAGD). SEAGD paid Hubbard a total amount of $208,848.88 to

work as an economic development consultant from March 2012 to August 2013.

SEAGD obtained a letter from the General Counsel for the Ethics Commission,

Hugh Evans, regarding Hubbards employment with SEAGD. In his letter, Evans

advised SEAGD that the Ethics Law mandated that the Speaker may not use his

position or the mantle of his office to assist him in obtaining consulting

opportunities or providing benefits to his consulting business or his clients..

(Evans Letter, AGdoc0063381, attached hereto as Exhibit 19).

Hubbard submitted monthly activity reports to SEAGD detailing his work

for which SEAGD was paying him $12,000.00 per month. Despite the clear

guidance in the letter from the Ethics Commission to SEAGD, Hubbards activity

reports show that he repeatedly wore the mantle of his office in activities for which

SEAGD compensated him. That is, Hubbard sought compensation from SEAGD

16

for his activities as a public official and therefore used his public office for

personal gain. See 36-25-5(a), Ala. Code (1975); (see Indictment, Count 7).

On one occasion, Hubbard reported to SEAGD that he met with Commerce

Secretary Greg Canfield regarding the relocation of a truck plant from

Pennsylvania to the Abbeville area. (AGdoc0051085, attached hereto as Exhibit

20). Hubbard also reported meeting with Secretary Canfield on several occasions

to discuss projects in Abbeville and Ozark. (AGdoc0051086, attached hereto as

Exhibit 21). These projects were important to SEAGD because one of the reasons

it hired Hubbard was to recruit new businesses to the southeast Alabama area that

would directly and indirectly result in the purchase of additional amounts of

natural gas from SEAGD.

Hubbard also reported meetings he arranged or attended in his official

capacity with Governor Robert Bentley as work for which he sought compensation

from SEAGD. For example, Hubbard reported meeting with Governor Bentley

about the Abbeville project and Hubbard outlined to the Governor what the state

would need to provide to land the project. (AGdoc0051088, attached hereto as

Exhibit 22). In that same report, Hubbard informed SEAGD that the Governor

would provide the necessary resources. (Id.). On another report to SEAGD,

Hubbard stated he had arranged a meeting for July 19, 2012 with Governor

17

Bentley and others to discuss the relocation of a business from Miami to the

Dothan Airport. (AGdoc0051090, attached hereto as Exhibit 23).

Hubbard also wore the mantle of his office in recruiting an industrial

refurbishing business, Commercial Jet, to relocate its business operations to the

southeast Alabama area. Hubbard reported to SEAGD that on July 12, 2012, he

had a meeting with Governor Bentley and his Chief of Staff, David Perry, to

discuss with them the Commercial Jet project and the commitment the State of

Alabama would need to make as well as funding sources. (AGdoc0051091,

attached hereto as Exhibit 24). Hubbard also reported to SEAGD that he had set up

and led a meeting on July 18, 2012 with Governor Bentley and others regarding the

Commercial Jet project. (Id.). In August 2012, Hubbard submitted a report to

SEAGD describing his coordinating a second meeting with Governor Bentley

regarding Commercial Jet on August 31, 2012. (AGdoc0051092, attached hereto

as Exhibit 25). Hubbard further reported Governor Bentley, Representative Paul

Lee, Representative Steve Clouse, Blaine Galliher, David Perry and local officials

were present at that August meeting. (Id.).

Hubbard continued to seek compensation from SEAGD for his duties as a

public official regarding Commercial Jet in September 2012. Hubbard reported to

SEAGD for that month as follows: The Commercial Jet project continues to move

forward. I participated in a conference call with Governor Bentley, Greg Canfield

18

and David Perry regarding the incentive package the state will offer. I continue to

be a cheerleader for the project and point out the obvious economic and political

benefits created by the successful recruitment of the company. I received a

commitment that the state will provide the necessary incentives. (AGdoc0051093,

attached hereto as Exhibit 26).

In October 2012, Hubbard reported to SEAGD that an executive from

Hankook Tire, Mr. Kim, suggested that Hubbard travel to South Korea to visit with

him. (AGdoc0051094, attached hereto as Exhibit 27). Hubbard explicitly noted

the importance of his public office to Kim in his October 2012 activity report: Mr.

Kim believes that my role in government would mean a great deal and put

Alabama at the top of the list if I were to visit. (Id.). Hubbard further reported

that he had spoken with Secretary Canfield and ensured that our area is

considered and we are included in the mix. (Id.).

Hubbard also wore the mantle of his office when he attended the Paris Air

Show in June 2013. Even though SEAGD paid for Hubbard to attend the Air

Show, Hubbard wore a name tag that identified him as Speaker of the House. (See

AGdoc0047918, AGdoc0047921, Invoices, etc., attached hereto as Exhibit 28);

(AG0742807, AG0742802, photos, attached hereto as Exhibit 29); (see also

AG0742798, Email from lobbyist Minda Riley Campbell to Hubbard, attached

19

hereto as Exhibit 30) (Here are the pictures I took of Mr. Speaker/Economic

Development Superstar).

Hubbard also acted as a paid representative for SEAGD in his dealings with

the Alabama Department of Commerce and the Office of the Governor for the

State of Alabama, which violated section 36-25-1.1, Ala. Code (1975). (See

Indictment, Counts 8-9). That section of the Ethics Law forbids members of the

Legislature from being paid to represent a person or business entity before an

executive department or agency. See 36-25-1.1, Ala. Code (1975). Hubbard met

with the Department of Commerce and the Governors Office on matters such as,

among other things, obtaining tax credits for Commercial Jet to relocate their

business in southeast Alabama. SEAGD paid Hubbard to incentivize Commercial

Jet to locate its business in that region in order to increase the sale of natural gas by

SEAGD. Thus, when Hubbard had meetings and other dealings with the

Department of Commerce and the Governors Office on behalf of SEAGD, he

violated the Ethics Law.

Since all of this information regarding Hubbards actions on behalf of

SEAGD is contained in the indictment and the States discovery production, the

indictment along with the States discovery clearly informs Hubbard of the nature

of the crimes with which he has been charged in Counts 7-9. Specifically, those

sources show that Hubbard wore the mantle of office in performing duties for

20

which he was compensated by SEAGD, and that he acted as a paid representative

for SEAGD during certain interactions with the Executive branch of state

government. Thus, his Motion for More Definite Statement should be denied as to

Counts 7-9.

IV. Count 10: Hubbards Contract with Principal Edgenuity/E2020.

Similar to his contract with APCI, Hubbard was paid $7,500.00 per month

from another principal, Edgenuity, Inc. and/or E2020, beginning in April 2012.

That company, like APCI, employed lobbyist Ferrell Patrick in Alabama and had

active interests in state government. Hubbard was therefore prohibited from

accepting things of value from Edgenutiy while Hubbard held public office. See

36-25-1.1, Ala. Code (1975); (Indictment, Count 10).

It is no mere coincidence that both APCI and Edgenuity employed Patrick

and Hubbard because Patrick assisted Hubbard in obtaining lucrative consulting

contracts with Patricks clients. Indeed, Hubbard emailed Patrick after meeting

with him and wrote he was: very excited about the opportunity to work with some

of your clients and appreciate your assistance. (AG0164395, Hubbard email to

Patrick, attached hereto as Exhibit 31). In the same email, Hubbard told Patrick

that he had helped one of Patricks other clients: On another note, I met with

[State Superintendant] Tommy Bice and talked to him about iTeach. He is

21

reviewing the material and will get back with me on setting up a meeting. I will let

you know. (Id.) (emphasis added).

Even though Hubbard was prohibited from taking things of value (i.e.,

$7,500.00 per month) from Edgenuity because they are a principal, Hubbard took

the money and his employment activities directly involved his public office.

Edgenuitys internal emails show that Hubbard served as the companys contact

for House Speakers in all 50 states. (AGdoc0158228, attached hereto as Exhibit

32). Hubbard emailed the President of Edgenuity, Michael Humphrey, to report

that he assisted Edgenuitys lobbying efforts with the South Carolina Speaker of

the House, Bobby Harrell.4 Hubbard emailed Humphrey and said: I hope the

contract in Charleston you were having issues with a while back is still going well.

I know Speaker Harrell got involved in that one following my call to him.

(AGdoc0158088, attached hereto as Exhibit 33) (emphasis added). Hubbard

therefore solicited and received a thing of value from a principal and his

compensation was provided for reasons directly related to Hubbards position as a

public official.

Thus, the indictment, along with the States discovery, shows that Hubbard

solicited and received $7,500.00 per month from Edgenuity, lobbyist Ferrell

4 Bobby Harrell was Speaker of the South Carolina House of Representatives from 2005 to 2014.

On October 23, 2014, Harrell resigned and pleaded guilty to misusing campaign funds for his

personal benefit. See Jeremy Borden, Bobby Harrell pleads guilty to 6 counts, resigns from

House seat, The Post and Courier, October 23, 2014,

available at: http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20141023/PC1603/141029750.

22

Patricks principal, under circumstances that indicate that the money was provided

for reasons related to Hubbards position as a public official. The State is not

required to provide Hubbard any further clarification, meaning his Motion for

More Definite Statement is due to be denied as to Count 10.

V. Counts 11-14: Hubbard used his office for personal gain through his

contract with Bobby Abrams business.

Counts 11 through 14 arise out of Hubbards contract with Bobby Abrams

and his businesses operating under CV Holdings, LLC. Hubbard solicited Abrams

in September 2012 to have Abrams hire Auburn Network, Inc., to help his plastic

cup company with sales, even though Hubbard candidly admitted that he did not

know anything about the cup business. (AG0541121, attached hereto as

Exhibit 34). In October 2012, Abrams hired Hubbard as a Consultant for

$10,000.00 per month. (AGdoc0119880, attached hereto as Exhibit 35).

Hubbard once again used the mantle of office to perform activities for

which he was compensated by Abrams company, in violation of 36-25-5(a) Ala.

Code (1975); (See Indictment, Count 11). Hubbard also used state equipment,

facilities, time, human labor and other public property under his control for the

private benefit of himself and his employer, Abrams. See 36-25-5(c), Ala. Code

(1975); (See Indictment, Count 14).

For example, in July 2013, CV Holdings requested Hubbards assistance

with a patent for which Abrams had applied. (AGdoc0120055, attached hereto as

23

Exhibit 36). Hubbard directed his Chief of Staff, Josh Blades, to assist Abrams

with speeding up the patent process. (See phone records of Blades call to the US

Patent office, AGdoc0197873, attached hereto as Exhibit 37). Hubbard also made

calls on Abrams behalf to the patent office. (AGdoc0016221-22, attached hereto

as Exhibit 38). With Blades assistance, Hubbard successfully helped Abrams

obtain the patent, which was issued in August 2013. Hubbard then commented to

Abrams that he hope[ed] [his] calls and pushing help speed it up a bit..

(AGdoc0119931, Hubbard email to Abrams, attached hereto as Exhibit 39).

Hubbard also used his position for personal gain by assisting Abrams with

lobbying the Alabama Department of Commerce and the Office of the Alabama

Governor to build a training center for workers that could be hired by Abrams

company. (See AGdoc0119901, attached hereto as Exhibit 40). Hubbard personally

spoke with Secretary Canfield and Governor Bentley on Abrams behalf on that

issue. (Id.). Hubbard also utilized another state employee under his control, Kristen

Hull, to arrange meetings with Canfield regarding Abrams businesses.

(AGdoc0119904, attached hereto as Exhibit 41). As a result, just like his activities

for SEAGD, Hubbard acted as a paid representative for Abrams in his dealings

with the Department of Commerce and the Governors Office, which is a violation

of 36-25-1.1, Ala. Code (1975); (see Indictment, Counts 12-13).

24

Hubbards Motion for More Definite Statement should therefore be denied

as to Counts 11-14 because the indictment, along with the documents produced by

the State during discovery, clearly informs Hubbard that he has been charged with:

(1) using his position as public official to obtain $10,000.00 per month from

Abrams business; (2) acting as a paid representative for Abrams in interactions

with the Executive branch of state government; and (3) using state equipment and

Hubbard and his staffs time and human labor for his and Abrams private business

benefit.

VI. Counts 15-19: Hubbards Craftmaster Investment Scheme.

Hubbard again violated the Ethics Laws ban on soliciting or receiving

things of value from lobbyists or principals in his efforts to raise $1,500,000.00 in

capital for Craftmaster. Hubbard solicited and received a $150,000.00 investment

from ten individuals four of whom have active interests in state government,

employ lobbyists, and are otherwise considered principals under Alabama law.

Hubbard also solicited lobbyist Dax Swatek to participate in the Craftmaster

scheme, but Swatek declined to invest. (See Indictment, Count 15). At the time of

the solicitation, Swatek was a registered lobbyist representing, among others, Hoar

Construction. (AGdoc0229159, attached hereto as Exhibit 42). Hubbard

successfully solicited and received investments from the following principals: (1)

Will Brooke, a Board Member and prior Chairman of the Business Council of

25

Alabama (BCA); (2) Stern Agee, an investment firm led by then-President and

CEO, James Holbrook; (3) Jimmy Rane, the President of Great Southern Wood;

and (4) Rob Burton, the President of Hoar Construction. (See Counts 16, 17, 18,

19). In all, Hubbard solicited and received $600,000.00 from these principals.

The Craftmaster investment scheme arose out of Craftmasters failure to pay

employee withholdings taxes to the federal government in 2011 and its

accumulation of a large amount of debt. (See Regions Amendment,

AGdoc0187173-76, attached hereto as Exhibit 42A); (Regions Extension

Agreement, AGdoc0187308-19, attached hereto as Exhibit 42B). Previously, in

2005, Craftmaster filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. (See Ex. 42A at

AGdoc0187174). Much of the debt that caused Craftmaster to file for bankruptcy,

however, was forgiven and the company was allowed to exit bankruptcy and

restructured its business. (See id.).

Although Craftmasters next few years were profitable, the company started

experiencing cash flow problems in 2008. (Id.). As Craftmasters revenues

slowed, their operating expenses outpaced the cash flowing back into the

operation and, as a result, Craftmaster remained under-capitalized and continue

to struggle with cash flow and debt service. (Id.). Craftmasters financial

problems were compounded by their failure to pay employee payroll taxes to the

federal government. (See id.) ([D]ue to the cash flow shortage during FY2011, the

26

borrower slowed in payroll tax payments and is currently, delinquent for

approximately $350[,000]. This situation has been turned over to their outside CPA

for appropriate action to repay and settle any fines or penalties. The borrower is

now paying its ongoing payroll taxes.).

Craftmasters failure to pay the taxes due also caused the company to default

on its $600,000.00 loan from Regions Bank. (See Ex. 42B, at AGdoc0187308)

(Various Events of Default have occurred under the Loan Documents,

including without limitation, the failure of [Craftmaster] to pay all payroll

withholding taxes to the IRS). This loan was personally guaranteed by

Hubbard. (Id.).

A. Hubbard Solicited and Received Things of Value from BCA

Principal Will Brooke.

Due to the tax and loan issues, Hubbard approached Brooke, a financial

advisor for Harbert Management Corporation and BCA Board member, for advice

on Craftmasters financial problems. Hubbard emailed Brooke and said: I know

you have a lot more important things on your mind, but I wanted to touch base on

my situation that we discussed a few weeks ago to see if youve had any more

thoughts. I am starting to get very nervous and am anxious to pursue any options

you might suggest.. (AGdoc0222553, email from Hubbard to Brooke, attached

hereto as Exhibit 43).

27

Hubbard expressed to Brooke, among others, that his financial problems had

the potential to ruin him personally and politically. (See AGdoc0221903, Hubbard

email to Brooke, attached hereto as Exhibit 44) (I will be anxious to hear your

thoughts, but I believe if I take the reins of the business, rIse [sic] the capital

necessary to eliminate the debt and most importantly take care of the tax debt I

can turn [Craftmaster] around. Failure is not an option as it means personal and

political ruin.) (emphasis added). That is, if Craftmaster could not raise sufficient

funds to pay the tax bill and its debts, then it would most likely file for bankruptcy

and Hubbard would be personally liable to Regions for the defaulted $600,000.00

loan.

Hubbard expressed to Brooke that he was very concerned personally and

politically about Craftmasters financial problems and Auburn Networks loss of

the IMG income. Hubbard further expressed that his work as Speaker was very

time-consuming and did not generate much income. After expressing those

concerns, Hubbard explained that he needed financial favors from Brooke in order

to avoid resigning his position as Speaker and a member of the House:

Personally, however, my employment with IMG, Auburns multi-media rights holder, ends at the end of this month As you know, my concern is financial and the fact that serving as Speaker

consumes a enormous amount of time and generates virtually no

income. I have been in discussions with Governor Riley and believe I

would have an opportunity to work with him and his company if I

were to give up being Speaker and resign from the Legislature.

Although I believe I am making positive changes in Montgomery, I

28

need to think of my obligations to my family. Please keep me in your

thoughts as I make this decision.

(AGdoc0221916-17, Hubbard email to Brooke, attached hereto as Exhibit 45

(emphasis added). Brookes response to Hubbards email indicates that he was

eager to help Hubbard fix his money problems to ensure that Hubbard would keep

his job as Speaker:

There should be a solution to this. I have spoken to many business

people about it, and have found no answer. I even spoke to Governor

Riley about it, and he told me that you two had discussed it and were

working on some options. I did not realize that path would lead to

your resignation but, on reflection, I guess that is a given. It is quite a

quandary.

(Id.).

After Hubbard made clear to Brooke in the course of these and other emails

that the financial problems of Craftmaster, among other things, could ruin Hubbard

personally and politically and might even cause Hubbard to resign as Speaker

Brooke provided a solution. Brooke gave Hubbard a free financial investment plan

and advised Hubbard to raise $1,500,000.00 in capital from ten investors at

$150,000.00 per person. In exchange for the money, each investor would be given

preferred stock in Craftmaster, which would pay the investor interest and dividends

over time. Hubbard later explained the plan to former Governor Bob Riley as

follows:

With regard to the Craftmaster deal I mentioned to you on Thursday,

Will Brooke has helped me put together a scenario that I believe will

29

work. If I can find 10 people to invest $150,000 (total of $1,500,000),

I can pay all of the back payroll taxes, virtually all of the remaining

debt (including 1/3 of the LOC) and free up roughly $40,000 per

month in cash flow. The offer is to pay a 6% return on the investment

beginning 3 months after the investment with a payback of the

original $150,000 in five years.

(AG0541955, attached hereto as Exhibit 46).

With Brookes financial plan for Craftmaster in hand, Hubbard met with

Regions bank to discuss Brookes financial plan. In an email sent after the meeting

with Regions, Hubbard told Brooke that he laid out the plan that [Brooke]

developed in a meeting with the [Regions] Trouble Asset Division.

(AGdoc0222186 and 187, attached hereto as Exhibit 47). In addition to providing

the free financial plan, Brooke also personally invested $150,000.00 in

Craftmaster. (AGdoc0232037, attached hereto as Exhibit 48). That is, even though

Brooke is a principal for the BCA, Hubbard solicited and received from Brooke

a free financial investment plan for Craftmaster and a $150,000.00 investment in

Hubbards failing printing business.5 (See Indictment, Counts 16 and 23). Hubbard

did so with the clear implication that Brookes failure to help Hubbard would very

likely result in Hubbard stepping down as Speaker.

5 Hubbard is charged with soliciting and receiving Brookes free financial plan in Count 23 of

the indictment. As discussed in Section VII, infra, Hubbard is charged in that same count with

soliciting and receiving assistance in obtaining new clients for the Auburn Network from

Brooke. (See Indictment, Count 23).

30

B. Hubbard Solicited and Received a $150,000.00 Investment in

Craftmaster from Principal Stern Agee.

Hubbard also solicited the President and CEO of Stern Agee, Jim Holbrook

who, like Brooke, is a principal under the Ethics Law to participate in the

Craftmaster investment scheme. After meeting with Holbrook, Hubbard emailed

Brooke as follows: I met with Jim Holbrook today in Bham. It went very well.

He indicated that he would almost certainly do one of the $150,000 deals and may

have its investors who would be interested on one []or two more!.

(AGdoc0222185, attached hereto as Exhibit 49) (emphasis added); (see also

Indictment, Count 17). Holbrook ultimately chose to invest Stern Agees money in

Craftmaster instead of personally investing in the business. (AGdoc0184125,

attached hereto as Exhibit 50).

C. Hubbard Solicited and Received a $150,000.00 Investment in

Craftmaster from Great Southern Wood Principal Jimmy Rane.

In September 2012, Hubbard solicited Jimmy Rane, also a principal under

the Ethics law, to participate in the Craftmaster investment scheme. When Hubbard

approached Rane about the investment, Rane told Hubbard to speak with Great

Southern Woods financial person Gene Woodham. (See AGdoc0221619,

Hubbard email to Rane, attached hereto as Exhibit 51). Just as Hubbard had

previously explained to Brooke, Hubbard told Rane that failure is not an

option. (Id.). In that same email, Hubbard added that Ranes [p]articipation

31

would be a huge help. (Id.). After Woodham signed off on the investment, Rane

invested $150,000.00 of his personal funds in Craftmaster. (See AGdoc0221603,

attached hereto as Exhibit 52).

D. Hubbard Solicited and Received a $150,000.00 Investment in

Craftmaster from Hoar Construction Principal Rob Burton.

Around the same time, Hubbard solicited Rob Burton, the CEO of Hoar

Construction and principal under the Ethics Law, to invest in Craftmaster. In one

of the emails Hubbard sent to Burton in the course of soliciting his investment,

Hubbard wrote as follows: I just wanted to check in with you regarding the

investment in Craftmaster. I have received the money from three (3) of the six (6)

investors thus far and am trying to get it all in so we can pay off Heidelberg (at a

discount) as well as the other parts of the plan I outlined for you.

(AGdoc0221787, email from Hubbard to Burton, attached hereto as Exhibit 53).

Burton later invested $150,000.00 of his personal funds in Craftmaster. (See

AGdoc0221812, attached hereto as Exhibit 54).

* * *

As demonstrated above, Hubbard believed Craftmasters dire financial

condition, among other money problems, could cause him personal and political

ruin. It is clear that [f]ailure was not an option for Hubbard, and his desperation

to avoid having to resign as Speaker motivated him to solicit lobbyists and

principals for money, even though the Ethics Law prohibits such activities. Indeed,

32

the States discovery production shows that Hubbards scheme to solicit and

receive $600,000.00 from principals was directly related to Hubbards service as a

public official. The indictment along with the States discovery thus clearly

informs Hubbard of the nature of the crimes with which he has been charged

regarding his scheme to solicit or receive money from lobbyists and principals for

Craftmaster. As a result, his Motion for More Definite Statement with regards to

Counts 15-19 is due to be denied.

VII. Counts 20-23: Hubbards Auburn Network Scheme.

In addition to soliciting and receiving investments in Craftmaster from

lobbyists and principals, Hubbard also solicited and received assistance with

obtaining new clients for the Auburn Network from lobbyists and others with

interests before the Alabama Legislature. Specifically, former Alabama Governor,

Bob Riley, who became a registered lobbyist after he left office, helped Hubbard

with obtaining potential new clients for the Auburn Network. (See Indictment,

Count 20). Lobbyists Minda Riley Campbell and Billy Canary, as well as BCA

principal Will Brooke, provided similar assistance. (See Indictment, Counts 21-23).

Additionally, as discussed above, Brooke also developed and provided a free

financial investment plan for Craftmaster. (See Indictment, Count 23).

Hubbards Auburn Network scheme arose out of, among other things, the

loss of Hubbards employment with IMG. As discussed above in Section III,

33

supra, IMG told Hubbard that his employment would be terminated effective

March 31, 2011. (AGdoc0200585, attached hereto as Exhibit 55). Hubbard told

Riley that IMG complained that Hubbard spent too much time on politics and

told [him] to choose. (AG0595776, attached hereto as Exhibit 56). Hubbard later

remarked to Riley that he was upset with Auburn University regarding IMGs

termination of Hubbard and said: AU doesnt seek my advice or even treat me

very well. As you know, they allowed IMG to kick me to the curb.and I am the

Speaker of the House!. (AG0536195, attached hereto as Exhibit 57) (emphasis

added).

Like Craftmasters potential bankruptcy and/or defaulting on loans

personally guaranteed by Hubbard, Auburn Networks financial problems similarly

concerned Hubbard both personally and politically. For example, Hubbard told

Riley that he had to sell stocks now to live off of, which isn't very comfortable for

the long term. (AG0546395, Hubbard email to Riley, attached hereto as Exhibit

58). Hubbard likewise remarked that his quest to be an effective Speaker had

been to the detriment to [his] personal and financial wellbeing. (AG0569373,

Hubbard email to Riley, attached hereto as Exhibit 59). In response to such emails,

Riley advised Hubbard to quit telling people you may have to step down as

speaker due to financial concerns. (AG0569790, attached hereto as Exhibit 60).

34

A. Hubbard Solicited Lobbyist Bob Riley for Things of Value.

The loss of the IMG business caused Hubbard to seek the assistance of Riley

and others to obtain new clients for Auburn Network. As discussed above, this led

to Hubbards $12,000.00 per month contract with SEAGD. In addition to this,

however, Hubbard went so far as to directly solicit Riley to have his lobbying firm,

Bob Riley & Associates (BR&A) hire Auburn Network on several occasions. In

fact, Hubbard once directly solicited lobbyist Riley for help and asked: Can I just

come work for BR&A? I need a job and this way I would work someone I

respect. (AG0594186, attached hereto as Exhibit 61). Hubbard and Riley later

discussed this possibility and Hubbard then emailed Riley that he: certainly

appreciate[d] your willingness to allow me to be a part of your next venture(s).

(AG0596605, Hubbard email to Riley, attached hereto as Exhibit 62).

Hubbard also communicated to Riley that Hubbard wished [he] could just

run [BR&A] for [Riley]. (AG0592859, attached hereto as Exhibit 63). In addition

to soliciting Riley to let Hubbard personally work for BR&A, Hubbard also

solicited Riley to have BR&A hire Auburn Network to handle marketing.

(AG0570038, attached hereto as Exhibit 64). Knowing that this would be illegal

under Alabama law so long as Riley was a registered lobbyist, Hubbard told Riley

that he could de-register as a lobbyist in order for Hubbard to be able to form a

business relationship with BR&A. (Id.). In fact, in one email Hubbard expressly

35

acknowledged that the Ethics Law forbids Hubbard from working for BR&A

because Riley was a lobbyist. (See Hubbard email to Riley, AG0670566, attached

hereto as Exhibit 64A) (I need to be a salesman for GB&R. Except for those

ethics laws. Who proposed those things?! What were we thinking?) (emphasis

added).

Hubbard then proposed an alternative scheme which, in Hubbards view,

would allow BR&A to legally hire Auburn Network:

I still believe that you are a "strategic business consultant", not a

lobbyist. You could hire a lobbyist for BR&A - a Riley Team person

who will do it for virtually nothing - which will allow BR&A to hire

Auburn Network, Inc. to handle your marketing needs. We could do

media buying, polling, focus groups, design work, printing, anything

you need.

(Hubbard email to Riley, AG0632622, attached hereto as Exhibit 64B); (see also

Hubbard email, AG0632828, attached hereto as Exhibit 64C) (The Governor is

NOT a lobbyist he is a strategic consultant!!!).

Riley did not, however, de-register as lobbyist. Nor did he change his title

to strategic consultant. Instead of hiring Hubbard, Riley tried to help Hubbard

obtain new clients for the Auburn Network. Riley also advised Hubbard that he

could either be Governor or be wealthy, but he could probably not be both:

I understand---believe me I went 14 years on a Gov payroll and it was a challenge. Now and from now on you and I are going to be

suspect in everything we do. However the ability to make great

change is given to few people and you are one of the rare ones that

can make it happen. Again question now is DO YOU WANT to be

36

Gov ----or---make alot of money: good thing is you could do either

but I am not sure its possible to do both. Talk to Rob and we will get together next week.

(AG0575264, Riley email to Hubbard, attached hereto as Exhibit 65) (emphasis

added).

After Riley helped Hubbard obtain his lucrative SEAGD contract, Hubbard

regularly sought assistance from Bob Riley in identifying new business

opportunities for SEAGD. (See, e.g., AG0546395, Hubbard email to Riley,

attached hereto as Exhibit 66) (I hope you can help me with the suppliers in

locating in SEAGD areas. I need to deliver something in order to justify my

existence.); (AG0528214, attached hereto as Exhibit 67) (emphasis added) (If

you have any clients/prospects for econ dev that you can help me set up meetings

with SEAGD, that would really help me.) (emphasis added).

Hubbards requests for assistance from Riley became desperate after

SEAGD reduced Hubbards salary from $12,000.00 per month to $7,500.00 per

month effective March 1, 2013. (See AGdoc0047945, attached hereto as Exhibit

68). Hubbards fear that SEAGD might terminate the entire contract contributed to

his desperation. (See AG0536175, attached hereto as Exhibit 69) (SEAGD cut my

monthly pay in half and some of the mayors want to cut if off completely. I

desperately need to get some site visits set up to show I am generating interest.

Any help or advice would be appreciated.); (AG0545282, Hubbard email to

37

Riley, attached hereto as Exhibit 70) (I need to visit with you and try and figure

out what I need to be doing. I dont want SEAGD to cut me loose!) (emphasis

added).

In addition to seeking Rileys assistance in identifying clients for SEAGD,

Hubbard also sought Rileys assistance with obtaining new clients for Craftmaster.

For example, on February 18, 2013, Riley mentioned his lobbying client, Allan

McArtor, the Chairman and CEO of Airbus Group, Inc., in an email to Hubbard.

(See AG0534038, attached hereto as Exhibit 71). In response, Hubbard wrote to

Riley: I would like to meet [McArtor], if possible. I really need to get some of

their printing business somehow. (Id.). Riley then replied that Hubbard should

solicit Wayne Smith, the CEO of Community Health Systems a principal

represented by lobbyist Dax Swatek.

On February 19, 2013, Riley asked Hubbard: Does Wayne Smith not have

printing business --- looks like that would be a good client a hospital has nothing

to [d]o with your position. (Id.). Hubbard then told Riley that he had already

solicited Wayne Smith for printing business for Craftmaster: I have asked him

and he [p]ut us in contact with the person doing the printing, but each individual

hospital does their own. We are pursuing. (Id.).

Accordingly, Hubbard violated the Ethics Law by soliciting and receiving

things of value from lobbyist Bob Riley.

38

B. Hubbard Solicited Lobbyist Minda Riley Campbell for Things of

Value.

Hubbard also solicited Rileys daughter and BR&A business partner,

lobbyist Minda Riley Campbell, for assistance with obtaining new clients for the

Auburn Network. Shortly after BR&A was formed on February 9, 2011, Hubbard

proposed to Campbell that he should quit as Speaker and just go to work with

Riley. (AG0593122, attached hereto as Exhibit 71A). Campbell responded and

said: you are where you need to be, Mr. Speaker. BR&A will be there when the

time is right. (Id.). Campbell later discussed Hubbard working for Riley and

proposed: what if dad dropped his lobbyist classification? I could be his lobbyist,

since i [sic] am already registered. BR and A could be a client. Then he could hire

you to build a pr/political machine. Or can we unring the bell? (AG0781036,

attached hereto as Exhibit 71B). Hubbard responded: The BR&A would work

great and is, in fact, what I had thought we were going to do. When he registered

as a lobbyist, it messed that up. I hope he can and will unring the bell, but Rob

seems to think it might be a problem. Im not sure. He should be a strategic

consultant, not a lobbyist. I dont know why he ever registered. (Id.)

Further, Campbell, like Riley, similarly gave Hubbard assistance with his

Auburn Network business. For example, in the summer of 2013, Hubbard attended

the Paris Air Show. Hubbard solicited lobbyist Minda Riley Campbell for

assistance with setting up meetings with prospective clients while in Paris.

39

Campbell agreed to do so and provided the assistance. (See AG0527448, Campbell

email to Hubbard, attached hereto as Exhibit 72) (I have started a list of

appointments for you while in Paris.). Hubbard wrote to Campbell: I will go

wherever you think is best. (Id.). Campbell set up a meeting in Paris for Hubbard

with Mr. Tan Pheng Hock, the President of Singapore Technologies Engineering

Ltd., an international aerospace company. (Id.); (see also AG0527452, attached

hereto as Exhibit 73).

In fact, Campbell actually coordinated and scheduled Hubbards entire 2013

Paris Air Show itinerary, including his transportation. (See AG0525651, Campbell

email to Hubbard, attached hereto as Exhibit 74) (Please find attached the

Speakers schedule for Paris. The car information is being worked out right now.).

Campbell also obtained tickets for Hubbard to attend an exclusive Tea at the

Ritz. (See AG0749674, attached hereto as Exhibit 75). Campbell sent Hubbard

the final schedule with details on June 13, 2013. (AG0742371, attached hereto as

Exhibit 76). Thus, Hubbard violated the Ethics Law by soliciting and receiving

things of value from lobbyist Minda Riley Campbell.

C. Hubbard Solicited BCA Lobbyist Billy Canary for Things of

Value.

Hubbard also solicited Billy Canary, the chief lobbyist and Executive

Director of the BCA, to assist him with obtaining new clients for the Auburn

Network. On one occasion, Hubbard accompanied Canary to Washington, D.C. to

40

meet with potential new clients. Hubbard summarized the trip in an email to

Brooke as follows: I am going to DC with Billy [Canary] next week to visit some

folks, including FedEx and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. (AGdoc0222546,

email from Hubbard to Brooke, attached hereto as Exhibit 77). Hubbard later

reported on his meeting with FedEx to Riley and said: Just met with FedEx. They

are spooked about me being an elected official. Dont think they will do anything

with me. At least I made a contact with their top governmental affairs person.

They said they would look for opportunities, but not hopeful. (AG0570048,

attached hereto as Exhibit 78).

Canarys assistance also extended to helping market and sell Hubbards

book, Storming the State House. The D.C. meetings Canary set up for Hubbard

also included meetings intended to be extremely beneficial for the marketing of

Storming the State House. (STSH) (AG0243637-AG0243640, attached hereto

as Exhibit 79). Hubbard further solicited Canary for marketing help by requesting

that Canary seek assistance from political consultant Karl Rove:

Bill: Do you think it would be possible to plant a seed with Karl

[Rove] (probably a little closer to October 2) for him to make mention

of STSH during his remarks at BCA? It would be a very nice plug and

would certainly raise my stature with the folks in the audience for him

to mention me

(AG0243349, attached hereto as Exhibit 80).

41

In addition to those meetings, Canary also arranged a meeting with Rainey

Foster, a partner in a multinational business, Leading Authorities, Inc. (Canary

email to Foster AG0351277, attached hereto as Exhibit 81) (Joining us for that

discussion would be our Speaker Mike Hubbard.). Canary also helped Hubbards

Auburn Network business by setting up meetings with several CEOs from

around the state for the Speaker. (AG0243272, attached hereto as Exhibit 82).

Therefore, Hubbards solicitation and receipt of things of value from BCA lobbyist

Billy Canary violated the Ethics Law.

D. Hubbard Solicited BCA Principal Will Brooke for Things of

Value.

Hubbard also directly solicited Canarys fellow BCA Board member, Will

Brooke, for the same assistance. (AGdoc0222546, attached hereto as Exhibit 83).

Hubbard emailed his request to Brooke: Please let me know if you have had any

ideas I might explore with companies in Birmingham or elsewhere that might have

a need for a consultant with my skills. We also discussed the possibility of a

corporate board where I might be helpful in opening doors. Brooke later

responded to tell Hubbard that he had acted on Hubbards request and that Brooke

took part in a few discussions in Birmingham, but nothing has surfaced yet. (Id.).

Hubbard later followed up with Brooke on January 26, 2012 and asked: did

you ever run across any company or companies interested in my services? My

employment [with IMG] runs out on March 31. (AGdoc0222027, attached hereto

42

as Exhibit 83A). In that email, Hubbard expressed his frustration that the business

community was very reluctant to work with him: Its ironic that I was the

architect of putting a pro-business legislature in place yet businesses seem to

want to avoid any personal association with me like the plague!. (Id.).

Hubbard later followed up with Brooke on his request for help finding new

clients for the Auburn Network and reminded Brooke that Hubbard had previously

used his public office to help Brooke with a personal matter:

I enjoyed visiting with Maggie [Brooke] at the State House last week and pledged my support again for the Boys and Girls Clubs. My

goal is to make sure she is never unhappy with me! I have not pestered you because I know you are extremely busy, but thought Id check with you one more time regarding any potential business

clients for my company, Auburn Network, Inc. I have signed up

Southeast Alabama Gas to assist them with marketing and economic

development which helps, but my employment with IMG ends at the

end of this month so I am getting very close to hitting the panic

button... It is ironic that my quest to change history and [g]ive

Alabama a pro-business legislature has resulted in issues in my own

personal business life. It is amazing how folks who urged me to be the

leader to overthrow the bad guys in Montgomery now dont want to talk with me.

(AGdoc0222423, attached hereto as Exhibit 84) (emphasis added).

As discussed above, Hubbard later told Brooke that he was considering

resigning as Speaker due to his financial problems. (See Section VI, supra). Just

over one week before the IMG income would end, Hubbard again expressed to

Brooke his displeasure with the business community and their unwillingness to

work with him:

43

I will make it through this session, try to do as much good as I can,

and make a decision as to what to do. It is amazing, and quite

disappointing, that after the sacrifices Ive made personally and professionally to finally get Alabama a pro-business legislature, no

one in the business community is willing to work with me

professionally to keep me there. Maybe Im too much of a lightning rod. I suppose, as they say, no good deed goes unpunished.

(AGdoc0222864, attached hereto as Exhibit 85) (emphasis added). Brooke

responded: No, Mike, thats not it. I think that folks are afraid to mess up, on

either their or your side of the equation. (Id.) (emphasis added).

As shown in detail above, Hubbard violated the Ethics Law by soliciting and

receiving things of value from BCA principal Will Brooke.

* * *

Hubbards scheme to solicit and receive assistance with obtaining new

clients for the Auburn Network from lobbyists and principals is therefore clear

from the charges in the indictment and the discovery. As shown above, Hubbard

was motivated by his financial problems, including the loss of his employment

with IMG, to solicit lobbyists and principals for things of value (i.e, consulting

contracts for Auburn Network, financial favors, etc.). Hubbards solicitation of

persons with interests before the Alabama Legislature was also directly related to

his service as a public official. Thus, his Motion for More Definite Statement as to

Counts 20-23 is due to be denied.

44

CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated above, the State of Alabama respectfully requests that

this Court enter an Order denying defendant Michael Gregory Hubbards Motion

for More Definite Statement.

Respectfully submitted this 27th day of February 2015.

W. VAN DAVIS

ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL

/s/ Miles M. Hart

Miles M. Hart

Deputy Attorney General

Chief, Special Prosecutions Division

mhart@ago.state.al.us

OF COUNSEL:

W. Van Davis

Supernumerary District Attorney,

Acting Attorney General

423 23rd

St. North

Pell City, AL 35125-1740

vandclaw@centurylink.net

Michael B. Duffy

Deputy Attorney General

mduffy@ago.state.al.us

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

STATE OF ALABAMA

501 Washington Avenue

P.O. Box 300152

Montgomery, AL 36130-0152

(334) 242-7300

(334) 242-4890 FAX

45

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have, this the 27th day of February 2015,

electronically filed the foregoing using the AlaFile system which will send

notification of such filing to the following registered persons, and that those

persons not registered with the AlaFile system were served a copy of the foregoing

by U. S. mail:

J. Mark White, Esq.

Augustus Dowd, Esq.

William Bowen, Esq.

William Chambers Waller, Esq.

White Arnold & Dowd P.C.

2025 Third Avenue North, Suite 500

Birmingham, AL 35203

Phone: (205) 323-1888

FAX: (205) 323-8907

mwhite@whitearnolddowd.com

adowd@whitearnolddowd.com

wmbowen@whitearnolddowd.com

cwaller@whitearnolddowd.com

R. Lance Bell

Trussell Funderburg Rea & Bell, PC

1905 1st Ave South

Pell City, AL 35125-1611

lance@tfrblaw.com

Phillip E. Adams, Jr.

Adams White Oliver Short & Forbus LLP

205 S 9th Street

Opelika, Alabama 36801

Phone: (334) 745-6466

Fax: (334) 749-2800

padams@adamswhite.com

/s/ Miles M. Hart

Deputy Attorney General